How can "Blade Runner 2049" be a financial failure when looking at its worldwide gross against its budget?

How can Blade Runner 2049 be a financial failure when it has grossed $223,133,333 worldwide against it's $150 million budget? I understand that foreign dist. companies get their cut and that there are advertising costs on top of the production budget, but I still feel like many movies that have similar numbers (perhaps smaller budgets) are know to be least mildly successful at the box office.

Image result for blade runner 2049 box-office

Earlier last month I wrote:

"Folks, sometimes the stars don't align for a smartly crafted blockbuster. "Blade Runner 2049," despite incredible reviews, crashed and burned at the weekend movie Box-Office. A $31.5M opening was not enough given the budget of the film, depending on who you speak to, was anywhere between $150-$170 Million. The film is on pace to not even make half that amount back domestically. It might break even We will see what will happen next weekend, maybe solid word of mouth and repeat viewings will give it some kind of staying power, it did garner an A- CinemaScore grade, but what we're looking at right now is a risk that didn't pay off for Warner Brothers. A $150M arthouse sequel to a cult film with a running time stretching close to the three-hour mark. How did we not expect this?"

However, now it does look like the worldwide tally has been better than expected for the film. Good for them, making a risky blockbuster is never a sure-thing for success, but European audiences seemed to have really been taken by "Blade Runner 2049."